Systematic review data extraction: cross-sectional study showed that experience did not increase accuracy.

@article{Horton2010SystematicRD,
  title={Systematic review data extraction: cross-sectional study showed that experience did not increase accuracy.},
  author={Jennifer Horton and Ben W Vandermeer and Lisa Hartling and Lisa Tjosvold and Terry P Klassen and Nina Buscemi},
  journal={Journal of clinical epidemiology},
  year={2010},
  volume={63 3},
  pages={289-98}
}
OBJECTIVE This study assessed the impact of systematic review and data extraction experience on the accuracy and efficiency of data extraction in systematic reviews. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING We conducted a prospective cross-sectional study from October to December 2006. Participants were classified as having minimal, moderate, or substantial experience in systematic reviews and data extraction. Three studies on insomnia treatment were extracted. Our primary outcome was the accuracy of data… CONTINUE READING
Related Discussions
This paper has been referenced on Twitter 2 times. VIEW TWEETS

From This Paper

Figures, tables, and topics from this paper.

Explore Further: Topics Discussed in This Paper

Citations

Publications citing this paper.
Showing 1-10 of 16 extracted citations

Meta-assessment of bias in science.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America • 2017

Clinical Epidemiology

Methods in Molecular Biology • 2015

References

Publications referenced by this paper.
Showing 1-10 of 12 references

Manifestations and management of chronic insomnia in adults.

Evidence report/technology assessment • 2005
View 2 Excerpts

A comparison of placebo effects in clinical analgesic trials versus studies of placebo analgesia. Pain 2002;99: 443e52

L Vase, JL IIIRiley, D. Price
2002
View 1 Excerpt

The dose effects of Zopiclone

J Lamphere, T Roehrs, F Zorick, G Koshorek, T. Roth
Hum Psychopharmacol • 1989

Similar Papers

Loading similar papers…